• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are you a libertarian if...

Are you a libertarian if you support this?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 53.8%
  • No

    Votes: 12 46.2%

  • Total voters
    26
When, in effect, it becomes "accept employer abuse or starve with no job".


Which is often the case in bad economic times like these, for those who are not in a high-demand position.
I totally get that concept, but when assigning blame, I don't try to blame the few people who actually are providing jobs. I tend to blame the politicians who are in dereliction of their duties by representing the needs of the rich few, vs the needs of their constituents.

The socialist's solution is to give more power to the corrupt men who are responsible for the very problem at hand, while I prefer to neuter their power, and redirect our attention towards rational self-interest.
 
Are you [still] a libertarian if you support business owners being able to exert power over employees?


This is one of the reasons I parted company with strict libertarianism, the more extreme adherents of which do not believe in ANY gov't intervention between employer and employee... no matter how heinously the former treats the latter. There is an assumption that the free market will take care of abusive employers.

Unfortunately, when the economy is slow and jobs scarce, this is not so.


In our American philosophy of governance, government is ESTABLISHED for the purpose of protecting LIBERTY... and no where is that need greater than in relationships between very powerful organizations and very not-empowered individuals. It is practially the sin-qua-non of government to prevent the individual from being unreasonably abused by the group, the weak from being unreasonably exploited by the strong.

Otherwise we'd have little need of government at all.
 
I totally get that concept, but when assigning blame, I don't try to blame the few people who actually are providing jobs. I tend to blame the politicians who are in dereliction of their duties by representing the needs of the rich few, vs the needs of their constituents.

The socialist's solution is to give more power to the corrupt men who are responsible for the very problem at hand, while I prefer to neuter their power, and redirect our attention towards rational self-interest.


That would be lovely.... IF people actually looked towards their long-term rational self-interest, and kept an eye on making sure their employer-employee relationship didn't become one of exploitation rather than mutual productivity.

Unfortunately so many people are very short-sighted and none too good at determining their rational self-interest, especially within the context of their position in society.

I part company with Objectivists in believing that rational self-interest is all we need... self-interest all too easily becomes selfishness unless tempered with compassion and fairness.

A rising tide may lift all boats, but when the tide goes out it is a different story.
 
That would be lovely.... IF people actually looked towards their long-term rational self-interest, and kept an eye on making sure their employer-employee relationship didn't become one of exploitation rather than mutual productivity.

Unfortunately so many people are very short-sighted and none too good at determining their rational self-interest, especially within the context of their position in society.

I part company with Objectivists in believing that rational self-interest is all we need... self-interest all too easily becomes selfishness unless tempered with compassion and fairness.

A rising tide may lift all boats, but when the tide goes out it is a different story.

And I agree with all of that. There certainly is a limited role that the government can play to better our society. I still however don't see how kinkos is the master market manipulator and the scourge of our society for paying Joe Bob fair market value for his labor.

We all agree, our economy is messed up, but who's fault is it, K-Mart's? Or corrupt politics?
 
And I agree with all of that. There certainly is a limited role that the government can play to better our society. I still however don't see how kinkos is the master market manipulator and the scourge of our society for paying Joe Bob fair market value for his labor.

We all agree, our economy is messed up, but who's fault is it, K-Mart's? Or corrupt politics?


Some of both actually. The gov't has a habit of screwing things up by playing favorites and pretending they can ignore Reality in favor of Oughta-be, but big business also has a habit of lobbying gov and buying Senators to get legislation that favors the big boys and tends to run Mom And Pop outta business.

It's a combination of the two... in fact, one could very well call it a real conspiracy, because it involves behind-the-scenes collaboration and unethical back-scratching and questionable money.
 
Some of both actually. The gov't has a habit of screwing things up by playing favorites and pretending they can ignore Reality in favor of Oughta-be, but big business also has a habit of lobbying gov and buying Senators to get legislation that favors the big boys and tends to run Mom And Pop outta business.

It's a combination of the two... in fact, one could very well call it a real conspiracy, because it involves behind-the-scenes collaboration and unethical back-scratching and questionable money.
It would be pretty pointless for big business to lobby someone who has no power to help them. Business I can understand, we can all take it at face value. Yeah, they're trying to make more money. Our politicians on the other hand, have taken an oath to uphold the constitution, and to represent their people. I hold them to a much higher standard. As long as we give our politicians the power to manipulate the market, they will.
 
It would be pretty pointless for big business to lobby someone who has no power to help them. Business I can understand, we can all take it at face value. Yeah, they're trying to make more money. Our politicians on the other hand, have taken an oath to uphold the constitution, and to represent their people. I hold them to a much higher standard. As long as we give our politicians the power to manipulate the market, they will.


I understand, but when you have so many big businesses that seem to be myopically focused on the short-term bottom line, to the detriment of their nation and fellow citizens, I think it is a problem.

For instance, all the big corps sending jobs and factories overseas where they can get extremely cheap labor, then importing the finished goods back to the lucrative US consumer market, all in the name of maximizing profits... never mind the cost in American jobs, never mind that in the long term this could undermine the very same rich US consumer market they depend on to sell the goods.

When about half the population is too poor to pay Fed income tax, something has gone awry.
 
I understand, but when you have so many big businesses that seem to be myopically focused on the short-term bottom line, to the detriment of their nation and fellow citizens, I think it is a problem.

For instance, all the big corps sending jobs and factories overseas where they can get extremely cheap labor, then importing the finished goods back to the lucrative US consumer market, all in the name of maximizing profits... never mind the cost in American jobs, never mind that in the long term this could undermine the very same rich US consumer market they depend on to sell the goods.

When about half the population is too poor to pay Fed income tax, something has gone awry.

I agree. One factor, but certainly not every factor, is that our government has pushed these businesses away with increased regulations and taxes. The other factor is that our citizens will still support these companies who outsource by buying their product. When we look at the end product though, we're benefitting from cheap foreign labor by getting such cheap products that even the poor can afford.

We as Americans should be more focused on higher skill jobs that the cheap foreign labor can't accomplish. Why would I want to glue arms onto an action figure 40 hours a week, when some guy in China will do it for me? Our economy has done a poor job of adapting to the global market. Instead of whining and complaining about cheap foreign labor, we should be capitalizing on it.

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Because I can't see how K-mart is damaging our economy by paying Joe Bob fair market value for his labor.
 
Are you [still] a libertarian if you support business owners being able to exert power over employees?

This is way too vague to respond to.

The guy writing your paycheck always has some power; they set the job description, they set the policies that employee works under...

Couldn't really work any other way...

So, yes? I guess. No doubt you have something else you want to say to "trap" us hapless libertarians because we're really not libertarians because of _____. Get to the filling in the blank, if so.
 
I agree. One factor, but certainly not every factor, is that our government has pushed these businesses away with increased regulations and taxes. The other factor is that our citizens will still support these companies who outsource by buying their product. When we look at the end product though, we're benefitting from cheap foreign labor by getting such cheap products that even the poor can afford.

We as Americans should be more focused on higher skill jobs that the cheap foreign labor can't accomplish. Why would I want to glue arms onto an action figure 40 hours a week, when some guy in China will do it for me? Our economy has done a poor job of adapting to the global market. Instead of whining and complaining about cheap foreign labor, we should be capitalizing on it.
.


There are problems though. Not everyone is suited for a desk job or something requiring a 4 yr degree. A good many people just aren't academically inclined, and a fair-sized minority just flat-out don't have what it takes to get a degree or perform intellectual labor, no matter how hard they work at it.

There should still be room for blue-collar workers to make a living in America without ending up in a rusty single-wide trailer with no electricity.
 
Because I can't see how K-mart is damaging our economy by paying Joe Bob fair market value for his labor.
Goshin has answered this fairly well already, but I'll put my spin on it as well.

Any individual and institution is capable of harming society or some of those within it: this includes businesses. Whether or not businesses are "just trying to make money" or paying someone an artificial "fair market value for their labor", their actions may still and, in many cases, have harmed individuals and society at large. In the same light, actions that the government has taken has harmed individuals and society in general. In fact, big business and the government have sometimes come together to develop policies that have harmed individuals and society at large.

For example, when the government allows businesses to offer home loans that will damage the entire economy and in turn, the entire country, it is both government and business that has harmed the nation. It isn't one or the other. They both took actions that were detrimental. Whether or not they should have taken those actions is not another question, but that they did take those actions is undeniable.

The point is that one cannot dismiss the harm that business can and has done to society simply because "it's a business's job to make money". There are ways to make money without doing so at the expense of other people and excusing the businesses who do unnecessarily make money at the expense of others is problematic. It holds people to lower standards that they can and should be held to in the name of an artificial expectation for what it means to be a business.
 
I addressed all of your one point. I'm also for campaign reform. I don't believe campaign contributions should be allowed in any form. A candidate should get an advertisement/campaign voucher, and it should be equal to all other candidates. I want to remove big business from politics.

If you'd like to believe, that calling my arguments crap and liquidating the private sector of responsibility addressed any single point, that's your choice.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/149440-you-libertarian-if-6.html#post1061376008

I like that you used the term "unaccountable entities". What you don't however seem to realize is that our government has become one of those. I would like to neuter them instead of empowering them
.I know where you stand, friend, you've made it clear in the past. You want more power for the government to manipulate the market, while I understand that it is the government power itself that creates the problem.

In my mind, the problem lies in the power we've centralized within the private sector. While you see fit to hand them more, I find that with the appropriate tweaks, the government can reign them in.

And it's the lesser of two evils. The government at least partially accountable, consisting of elected officials.

You blame the businesses for EVERYTHING. From your posts, the only logical conclusion can be that you believe all business owners are the monopoly man, raping freedom and sacking profits.!

If history agrees with me, I can't help but feel that way. It is not reality I bend to my ideas, but my ideas that bend to reality.
 
There are problems though. Not everyone is suited for a desk job or something requiring a 4 yr degree. A good many people just aren't academically inclined, and a fair-sized minority just flat-out don't have what it takes to get a degree or perform intellectual labor, no matter how hard they work at it.

There should still be room for blue-collar workers to make a living in America without ending up in a rusty single-wide trailer with no electricity.
Of course, but most of the outsourced jobs are factory jobs, not real blue collar jobs. We should be happy that we're getting such cheap products so that we may use them to build even better things.

For example, I recently bought an ultrasonic sensor for the robot I'm building from China for 2 dollars. This little circuit board emits ultrasonic signals, measures the return time, then produces a proportional electrical signal. I could now take this cheap ultrasonic sensor and design a line of robots assembled by Americans with it. We can now enjoy a cheap product because some guy in China worked his ass off in a factory to give us a cheap product to build great things with.
 
This is one of the reasons I parted company with strict libertarianism, the more extreme adherents of which do not believe in ANY gov't intervention between employer and employee... no matter how heinously the former treats the latter. There is an assumption that the free market will take care of abusive employers.

Unfortunately, when the economy is slow and jobs scarce, this is not so.


In our American philosophy of governance, government is ESTABLISHED for the purpose of protecting LIBERTY... and no where is that need greater than in relationships between very powerful organizations and very not-empowered individuals. It is practially the sin-qua-non of government to prevent the individual from being unreasonably abused by the group, the weak from being unreasonably exploited by the strong.

Otherwise we'd have little need of government at all.
Funny, that's exactly where I part ways with all you crypto-fascist republicans. You guys talk a good game about liberty but in the same breath you'll unashamedly promote authoritarian policies, apparent with no sense of irony. You guys are perfectly cool with infringing on essential liberty and god-given rights as long as it suits your own personal prejudices. Disgusting.
 
Goshin has answered this fairly well already, but I'll put my spin on it as well.

Any individual and institution is capable of harming society or some of those within it: this includes businesses. Whether or not businesses are "just trying to make money" or paying someone an artificial "fair market value for their labor", their actions may still and, in many cases, have harmed individuals and society at large. In the same light, actions that the government has taken has harmed individuals and society in general. In fact, big business and the government have sometimes come together to develop policies that have harmed individuals and society at large.

For example, when the government allows businesses to offer home loans that will damage the entire economy and in turn, the entire country, it is both government and business that has harmed the nation. It isn't one or the other. They both took actions that were detrimental. Whether or not they should have taken those actions is not another question, but that they did take those actions is undeniable.

The point is that one cannot dismiss the harm that business can and has done to society simply because "it's a business's job to make money". There are ways to make money without doing so at the expense of other people and excusing the businesses who do unnecessarily make money at the expense of others is problematic. It holds people to lower standards that they can and should be held to in the name of an artificial expectation for what it means to be a business.

Ive already stated that the relationship between business and government is a disease. For example, what if some guy tried to bang Joe Bob's wife. Lets say she went through with it. Who should Joe be madder at? The asshole who was simply looking out for himself, or the wife who swore an oath of loyalty to Joe?

Our politicians swore an oath of loyalty to us, and they are violating that oath. K-mart doesn't owe us ****.
 
Of course, but most of the outsourced jobs are factory jobs, not real blue collar jobs. We should be happy that we're getting such cheap products so that we may use them to build even better things.

For example, I recently bought an ultrasonic sensor for the robot I'm building from China for 2 dollars. This little circuit board emits ultrasonic signals, measures the return time, then produces a proportional electrical signal. I could now take this cheap ultrasonic sensor and design a line of robots assembled by Americans with it. We can now enjoy a cheap product because some guy in China worked his ass off in a factory to give us a cheap product to build great things with.


I get your point... but I live in the South. When I was born, most people worked in factories and made a decent living doing it. Today, most of those factories are closed, and most of the people that worked in them are working lower-paying service jobs. Yes, we've managed to attract SOME factories from other parts of the country, because our state has less regs and taxes than many and no legal status for unions, but it hasn't made up the shortfall by a long shot. I'm not speaking theoretically... I'm talking about people I know, including family and neighbors.

It may "solve" some problems, but it also creates others.

Construction... well we have lots of that but it has mostly been taken over by illegals working for peanuts, a concrete mason that made $20 an hour in the 80s is lucky if he can find a job literally for anything more than minimum wage today. Again, I'm talking about people I know personally.

I've seen so many businesses close their doors and NOT reopen at all, not even under another owner, in the past decade... it worries me.
 
I get your point... but I live in the South. When I was born, most people worked in factories and made a decent living doing it. Today, most of those factories are closed, and most of the people that worked in them are working lower-paying service jobs. Yes, we've managed to attract SOME factories from other parts of the country, because our state has less regs and taxes than many and no legal status for unions, but it hasn't made up the shortfall by a long shot. I'm not speaking theoretically... I'm talking about people I know, including family and neighbors.

It may "solve" some problems, but it also creates others.

Construction... well we have lots of that but it has mostly been taken over by illegals working for peanuts, a concrete mason that made $20 an hour in the 80s is lucky if he can find a job literally for anything more than minimum wage today. Again, I'm talking about people I know personally.

I've seen so many businesses close their doors and NOT reopen at all, not even under another owner, in the past decade... it worries me.

The role of government isn't to "solve problems," it is to protect essential liberty. Failed businesses and other such problems are a private matter, not a public one. As Goshin amply demonstrates in the above post, republicans haven't got the stomach for liberty.
 
I get your point... but I live in the South. When I was born, most people worked in factories and made a decent living doing it. Today, most of those factories are closed, and most of the people that worked in them are working lower-paying service jobs. Yes, we've managed to attract SOME factories from other parts of the country, because our state has less regs and taxes than many and no legal status for unions, but it hasn't made up the shortfall by a long shot. I'm not speaking theoretically... I'm talking about people I know, including family and neighbors.

It may "solve" some problems, but it also creates others.

Construction... well we have lots of that but it has mostly been taken over by illegals working for peanuts, a concrete mason that made $20 an hour in the 80s is lucky if he can find a job literally for anything more than minimum wage today. Again, I'm talking about people I know personally.

I've seen so many businesses close their doors and NOT reopen at all, not even under another owner, in the past decade... it worries me.

My town has had greater success attracting business investment from privately owned foreign (mostly European) companies than publicly traded US companies. The best angle for the future seems to be to say screw dealing with Wall Street and focus on attracting those sorts of investments.
 
The role of government isn't to "solve problems," it is to protect essential liberty. Failed businesses and other such problems are a private matter, not a public one. As Goshin amply demonstrates in the above post, republicans haven't got the stomach for liberty.


Guy, if you're looking for a dyed-in-the-wool Republican to bait, I hate to tell you: you got the wrong man.

So how about you go bother someone else...
 
Guy, if you're looking for a dyed-in-the-wool Republican to bait, I hate to tell you: you got the wrong man.

So how about you go bother someone else...

Whatever you call yourself does not matter, you are espousing authoritarian principles. I am calling it as I see it, and advocating that the government step in to protect failed businesses is fascism. If you consider an honest and accurate assessment of your political beliefs to be "bait" then I got news for you, the problem ain't me for telling the truth. The problem is your authoritarian beliefs that are antithetical to liberty.
 
If food is located at the bottom of a cliff, and I am starving to death, is it a voluntary act to climb down to the food?


I would argue no. I would argue that someone TRULY starving to death, has that choice made for them, biologically.

That is the essence of what is being debated here.

So, question to the OP...

Are the average workers in the US starving to death, or dieing of thirst...or even in any DANGER of doing so, sans a job?

And my answer to that is a resounding no. There are very very very few people in this country in danger of dying as a result of unemployment. You could call them the .001%, even.
 
The role of government isn't to "solve problems," it is to protect essential liberty. Failed businesses and other such problems are a private matter, not a public one. As Goshin amply demonstrates in the above post, republicans haven't got the stomach for liberty.
Actually, when a failed business impacts the public - it becomes a public matter inherently. Businesses, despite what libertarians would like to pretend, do not exist in vacuum. Sometimes, their irresponsible behavior screws everybody else and then it becomes society's business and since government is supposed to act on behalf of the people - the people can elect politicians who will develop policies to do just that.
 
There are problems though. Not everyone is suited for a desk job or something requiring a 4 yr degree. A good many people just aren't academically inclined, and a fair-sized minority just flat-out don't have what it takes to get a degree or perform intellectual labor, no matter how hard they work at it.

There should still be room for blue-collar workers to make a living in America without ending up in a rusty single-wide trailer with no electricity.

On the flip side of that coin, there are a great deal of folks not suited to blue collar labor, either, if we can even still call it that. I've fired a good deal of folks that can't stand the idea of actually working.
 
Back
Top Bottom